Another theory is that motorcycles tend to be or are perceived to be a secondary recreational vehicle and they wanted the tax dollars to support replacement of primary vehicles instead?
You're right - it's a perception thing. However, they'll still give the full credit ($6000) for a Tesla roadster...not really a "primary vehicle" in my view either!
Makes me wonder. Zero only sold a few hundred bikes last year. Based on what my dealer said; it sounds like Colorado was responsible for 15-25 of those bikes. Only 15-25 bikes, at $8000 for a ZF9 and $5500 for a ZF6. How are they going to sell any this year? Of course a couple of rich enthusiasts will buy...if they don't go to Brammo. But beyond that?
For sure, I would NOT have forked over $11,500 for my SZF6 last year. And now, $14,000 minimum entry for a 2013 'S' bike? Really?
I'm a little down on e-motos today, I guess. Last year I let literally 30-40 people test ride my zero. I talked it up to everyone I met. Everyone seemed impressed and excited - but the reality is no one actually bought one - even at the (then) 1/2-off colorado prices.
Maybe Flar hit it on the head. 99.9% of motorcycles are "secondary recreational vehicles". The Harley hogs, the crotch rocket crowd and the die-hard goldwing/bmw tourers all seem like poor fits for e-motos. Zero's strengths: low-operating-costs, great-for-commuting, geeky and green just don't appeal to the 99.9% crowd.
Nonetheless, I have gathered all the email's/contact info for my district's and neighboring districts state representatives, and I am going to make a concerted effort to get ahold of each and every one and make a case to get some level of credit reinstated for emotos. If you've ever attempted such a feat (I haven't) I'd appreciate any tips regarding ways to approach them, styles, points to make, etc.